diff --git a/docs/intro/comparisons.md b/docs/intro/comparisons.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..34903a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/intro/comparisons.md @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ +--- +title: Comparisons +--- + +We think it's important to understand that *Co-op Cloud* is more than just +software and technical configurations. It is also a novel organization of *how* +to [create technology socially](https://docs.coopcloud.tech/federation). +However, strictly technically speaking you may be wondering: + +### What about `$alternative`? + +We have various technical critiques of other similar projects which are already up-and-running in the ecosystem, as they don't necessarily meet our needs as a small tech co-op. However, Co-op Cloud isn't meant to be a replacement for these other projects. + +Here is a short overview of the pros/cons we see, in relation to our goals and needs. + +### Cloudron + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Decent web interface for app, domain & user management. +- 👍 Large library of apps. +- 👍 Built-in SSO using LDAP, which is compatible with more apps and often has a better user interface than OAuth. +- 👍 Apps are actively maintained by the Cloudron team. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Moving away from open source. The core is now proprietary software. +- 👎 Libre tier has a single app limit. +- 👎 Based on Docker images, not stacks, so multi-process apps (e.g. parsoid visual editor for Mediawiki) are a non-starter. +- 👎 Difficult to extend apps. +- 👎 Only supported on Ubuntu LTS. +- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't involved in packaging. +- 👎 Limited to vertical scaling. +- 👎 Tension between needs of hosting provider and non-technical user. +- 👎 LDAP introduces security problems - one vulnerable app can expose a user's password for all apps. +- 👎 Bit of a [black box](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box). + +### YunoHost + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Lovely web interface for app, domain & user management. +- 👍 Bigger library of apps. +- 👍 Awesome backup / deploy / restore continuous integration testing. +- 👍 Supports hosting apps in subdirectories as well as subdomains. +- 👍 Doesn't require a public-facing IP. +- 👍 Supports system-wide mutualisation of resources for apps (e.g. sharing databases by default) + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't involved in packaging. +- 👎 Uninstalling apps leaves growing cruft. +- 👎 Limited to vertical scaling. +- 👎 Not intended for use by hosting providers. + +### Caprover + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Bigger library of apps. +- 👍 Easy set-up using a DigitalOcean one-click app. +- 👍 Works without a domain name or a public IP, in non-HTTPS mode (good for homeservers). +- 👍 Deploy any app with a `docker-compose.yml` file as a "One Click App" via the web interface. +- 👍 Multi-node (multi-server) set-up works by default. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Single-file app definition format, difficult to tweak using entrypoint scripts. +- 👎 Nginx instead of Traefik for load-balancing. +- 👎 Command-line client requires NodeJS / `npm`. +- 👎 [Requires 512MB RAM for a single app](https://github.com/caprover/caprover/issues/28). +- 👎 [Backup/restore is "experimental"](https://caprover.com/docs/backup-and-restore.html), and doesn't currently help with backing up Docker volumes. +- 👎 Exposes its bespoke management interface to the internet via HTTPS by default. + +### Ansible + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Includes server creation and bootstrapping. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't publishing Ansible roles. +- 👎 Lots of manual work involved in things like app isolation, backups, updates. + +### Kubernetes + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Helm charts are available for some key apps already. +- 👍 Scale all the things. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Too big -- requires 3rd party tools to run a single-node instance. +- 👎 Not suitable for a small to mid size hosting provider. + +### Docker-compose + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Quick to set up and familiar for many developers. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Manual work required for process monitoring. +- 👎 Secret storage not available yet. +- 👎 [Swarm is the new best practice](https://github.com/BretFisher/ama/issues/8#issuecomment-367575011). + +### Doing it Manually (Old School) + +#### Pros + +- 👍 Simple - just follow upstream instructions to install and update. + +#### Cons + +- 👎 Loads of manual work required for app isolation and backups. +- 👎 Array of sysadmin skills required to install and maintain apps. +- 👎 Hard to share configurations into the commons. +- 👎 No idea who has done what change when. diff --git a/docs/intro/faq.md b/docs/intro/faq.md index fbc17a3..c278fec 100644 --- a/docs/intro/faq.md +++ b/docs/intro/faq.md @@ -40,118 +40,6 @@ Also see our [strategy page](../strategy/). See ["Package your first recipe"](/maintainers/tutorial/#package-your-first-recipe) for more. -## What about `$alternative`? - -We have various technical critiques of other similar projects which are already up-and-running in the ecosystem, as they don't necessarily meet our needs as a small tech co-op. However, Co-op Cloud isn't meant to be a replacement for these other projects. - -Here is a short overview of the pros/cons we see, in relation to our goals and needs. - -### Cloudron - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Decent web interface for app, domain & user management. -- 👍 Large library of apps. -- 👍 Built-in SSO using LDAP, which is compatible with more apps and often has a better user interface than OAuth. -- 👍 Apps are actively maintained by the Cloudron team. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Moving away from open source. The core is now proprietary software. -- 👎 Libre tier has a single app limit. -- 👎 Based on Docker images, not stacks, so multi-process apps (e.g. parsoid visual editor for Mediawiki) are a non-starter. -- 👎 Difficult to extend apps. -- 👎 Only supported on Ubuntu LTS. -- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't involved in packaging. -- 👎 Limited to vertical scaling. -- 👎 Tension between needs of hosting provider and non-technical user. -- 👎 LDAP introduces security problems - one vulnerable app can expose a user's password for all apps. -- 👎 Bit of a [black box](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box). - -### YunoHost - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Lovely web interface for app, domain & user management. -- 👍 Bigger library of apps. -- 👍 Awesome backup / deploy / restore continuous integration testing. -- 👍 Supports hosting apps in subdirectories as well as subdomains. -- 👍 Doesn't require a public-facing IP. -- 👍 Supports system-wide mutualisation of resources for apps (e.g. sharing databases by default) - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't involved in packaging. -- 👎 Uninstalling apps leaves growing cruft. -- 👎 Limited to vertical scaling. -- 👎 Not intended for use by hosting providers. - -### Caprover - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Bigger library of apps. -- 👍 Easy set-up using a DigitalOcean one-click app. -- 👍 Works without a domain name or a public IP, in non-HTTPS mode (good for homeservers). -- 👍 Deploy any app with a `docker-compose.yml` file as a "One Click App" via the web interface. -- 👍 Multi-node (multi-server) set-up works by default. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Single-file app definition format, difficult to tweak using entrypoint scripts. -- 👎 Nginx instead of Traefik for load-balancing. -- 👎 Command-line client requires NodeJS / `npm`. -- 👎 [Requires 512MB RAM for a single app](https://github.com/caprover/caprover/issues/28). -- 👎 [Backup/restore is "experimental"](https://caprover.com/docs/backup-and-restore.html), and doesn't currently help with backing up Docker volumes. -- 👎 Exposes its bespoke management interface to the internet via HTTPS by default. - -### Ansible - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Includes server creation and bootstrapping. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Upstream libre software communities aren't publishing Ansible roles. -- 👎 Lots of manual work involved in things like app isolation, backups, updates. - -### Kubernetes - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Helm charts are available for some key apps already. -- 👍 Scale all the things. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Too big -- requires 3rd party tools to run a single-node instance. -- 👎 Not suitable for a small to mid size hosting provider. - -### Docker-compose - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Quick to set up and familiar for many developers. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Manual work required for process monitoring. -- 👎 Secret storage not available yet. -- 👎 [Swarm is the new best practice](https://github.com/BretFisher/ama/issues/8#issuecomment-367575011). - -### Doing it Manually (Old School) - -#### Pros - -- 👍 Simple - just follow upstream instructions to install and update. - -#### Cons - -- 👎 Loads of manual work required for app isolation and backups. -- 👎 Array of sysadmin skills required to install and maintain apps. -- 👎 Hard to share configurations into the commons. -- 👎 No idea who has done what change when. ## Which technologies are used? diff --git a/mkdocs.yml b/mkdocs.yml index 6ea1ca1..cda5ac0 100644 --- a/mkdocs.yml +++ b/mkdocs.yml @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ nav: - index.md - "Frequently asked questions": intro/faq.md - "Project strategy": intro/strategy.md + - "Comparisons": intro/comparisons.md - "Project status": intro/bikemap.md - "Managed hosting": intro/managed.md - "Get in touch": intro/contact.md